[smokiyee]

Hello,

My name is Johnnie and I was at the Lucky derby last week, I believe it was Chinese New year if I'm not mistaken. Anyway, I was playing 4/8 limit hold em when something strange happened. I was in a pot when the guy next to me bet on the river and I called and the black guy on the end called as well. The first guy showed his hand which beat me so I mucked my cards and so did the black guy sitting in last position. All of a sudden, the black guy asked to see my mucked cards and the dealer showed my A/Q suited that I mucked. I was pretty irritated with this because this can't be standard practice. The dealer then made me feel like an idiot because she said this is a rule at the Lucky Derby. I would like some clarification on this issue. What gives him the right to see my mucked cards because I called a bet on the river. This is ridiculous! I have never heard of any rules like this. When the cards are mucked, the cards are dead. The dealer or the black guy for that mattter, has no right to see my cards. That is just unheard of. If this is a so called rule, I will never play at your establishment again and I will definitely spread the word about this so called rule. I am not trying to be a jerk about this, but this is just unheard of. I have been playing poker for a long time and I have never heard anything about this disturbing so called rule.

Thanks,

Johnnie

 

[Quads]

I've played in several card rooms and home games where there is a general rule which states something to the effect of a player who called another players had (him versus you) does have the option to see the other players hand.

So, if you bet, and someone else called, you are "obligated" to turn your cards over first to show your hand. If you bet, and you are called and the other player shows his cards first, and you see that he beats you, you can muck, but yes, the other player had the option to call for seeing your hand.

It's a rule that is out there and enforced in a variety of ways in different games and card rooms and there are several twists or versions to the rule itself.

Robert's Rules of Poker, as well Caro's and Cooke's Rules of poker both mention this:
11.08 REQUESTS TO SEE A CALLED HAND. Players shall not be entitled to see a called hand except in cases where there is a reasonable suspicion of collusion, in which case the floorperson shall be called over for examination of the called hand. This is contrary to the traditional rule. However the traditional rule, which was designed to prevent collusion, has not served its original purpose. Asking to see called hands slows down the game, causes resentment and impedes action. The first alternate rule continues to be the most prevalent, but in the interests of the game it should be completely done away with. (Alternate Rule. At the showdown, any player who was dealt into the hand has the right to ask to see any called hand. Before turning over the hand the dealer shall kill the hand by touching it to the muck. If the hand is not killed it is still live and eligible to win the pot. In high limit games, the right to see a called hand is limited to situations where a floorperson is present for the request. The purpose of this rule is to protect against collusion, not to satisfy a player's curiosity or get a read on a player's style of play, or worst of all to intentionally irritate a player. Abuse of this rule is very bad for poker as it kills action and causes resentment. Many people favor retention of this rule because it makes new players comfortable that they are not being cheated. Second Alternate Rule. Only players who have been in on the turn in hold em games, fifth street in stud games, and for the draw in draw games shall have the right to see a called hand; also, a winner cannot ask to see a loser's hand.) Where the right to see a called hand is the rule, continuous requests to see hands shall be considered a breach of poker etiquette and may be grounds for removal from the game. There is no right to see a called losing hand under any circumstances in head's up play.

 

[Quads]

For the sake of content, I'm going to move this thread to Poker Discussion for all to enjoy.

 

[Moddy]

But he wasn't the one betting - he was doing the calling. He should have been under no obligation (that I'm aware of) to show his cards to any player. Now, the guy that made the bet - whether he was beat or not, he WAS obligated to show his cards.


Again, this is how I understand it, and I may be wrong - it wouldnt' be the first time.

 

[Quads]

Agreed, that's where who's variation of which rule gets applied and how it is enforced.

We had a situation up in Tahoe last week that was similar to this. Someone called to see a hand and a big stink was raised about it. The other item of interest here, the dealer made it VERY clear to this player that if he turned over the other players hand (which the player mucked) and it was in fact the winner, that regardless of the hand being mucked prior, the dealer would push the pot to the winner.

This is where the case on possible collusion of a table comes into play. Needless to say, the hand was shown, everybody pulled their skirts down and got back to playing cards and quit with "can I see that hand" crap, which I personally think is pointless 95% of the time.

 

[Stockton_Dave]

That's why you should ask to see the house rules before you sit down at the table.

One card room I used to frequent in Stockton had a rule that ANYONE seated at the table could ask to see any hand still playing at showdown.

They also had a rule that any cards touching the muck face down are dead.

It became very interesting one evening when some jerk started asking to see about everyother showdown. Someone was going to muck their hand and this guy asked to see it. The pot was about $50 in 3/6. The "winner" had an Ace high straight, the almost mucked cards were suited and the muckee was playing two pair, neglecting or not comprehending that the turn and river gave him like a Q or J high flush.

The chips hadn't been pushed yet and the dealer exposed the unmucked cards. Once it was annouced by the dealer and confirmed by the floor person that the pot was going to be awarded to the flush, the guy with the straight went ballistic and went across the table at the jerk. Needless to say most of us at the game wouldn't of come to the jerks rescue. Fortunately for the jerk he wasn't against the wall and backed out fast.... Security grabbed the guy foaming at the mouth and got him calmed down.

The flush was paid off, he offered to split, but the club made good the mess by giving the straight two stacks ($40). The club cashed out the jerk and asked him not to return anymore.

New rule went into effect immediately. Dealer will kill any hands to be exposed by touching the muck face down prior to exposing.

 

[Hagar]

There are several variations on the "rule", but in general, it's very common that a player involved in a showdown, can be asked to show his cards - I've never seen a room that doesn't allow this in some manner.

Some rooms require that the request must come from someone else involved in the showdown; other rooms allow anyone at the table to request it. It doesn't matter who's betting or who's calling - just being involved in the showdown is all it takes.

I've never seen it where the hand can be "good" after mucking (as Quads reported), but every room seems to use a different set of rules for all the "little" stuff. Usually, the dealer will mkae a point of "killing the hand" by touching the cards to the muck pile so that the hand is "officially" dead.

The purpose of this rule (as I understand it) is supposed to be for collusion detection (per Quad's rule quote), but most players that call for seeing the hand are abusing the rule to gain information on the player's style.

 

[Quads]

In the example I quoted in Tahoe where the player folded and the dealer went though the explaination, the players folded cards hadn't yet hit the muck (yet). They were folded down on the table and the dealer had his hand over them.

 

[smokiyee]

The black guy in last position to call,raise, or fold just wanted to see what I was holding. I understand it wasn't the winning hand. I didn't even have a pair but I was on the draw for a nut flush. I missed and with pot odds I figured I would at least call at this point. This is 4/8 mind you so it was eight bucks to call to see. I called his bet, he showed his pair of kings bum kicker and I mucked. The black guy is last to act and he calls and mucks in last position. Then all of a sudden, the black guy asked to see what I had when the cards were already dead. I don't agree with this rule at all. I was pretty heated about it. I haven't played at lucky derby since. I don't feel just because I called a bet on the river that it entitles anyone to see what i was holding. That is just ridiculous! And if you think about it, it doesn't make sense. It would be like me betting on the river and two players call. I show and both muck. Does this give me the right to see what they had? Then I say, what did they have dealer. I will agree with one thing, It does take away from the game. He just wanted to see what i folded. Thanks,

Johnnie